News Post

Sound off: Did the NCAA Go Far Enough with Penn State?

09:54 AM - July 23, 2012 by RaychelSnr

The penalties are in. In what was unprecedented and swift action against Penn State University (which Penn State fully agreed with), the NCAA did the following:

Four Year Postseason Ban
Reduced Scholarships to 65 total over the next four years -- making Penn State a functional FCS team.
$60 million fine, or one year gross revenue from the football program.
Any player can freely transfer to another school without penalty.
All wins vacated from 1998 to 2011.

So what do you think? Did the NCAA go far enough in their penalties against Penn State?

Sound off!

Member Comments

# 1 ThaShark28_316 @ 07/23/12 09:58 AM

They gave them a working death penalty.

"Hey, I mean...you can play. You know, give everyone the illusion that you're playing football"

# 2 ImTellinTim @ 07/23/12 10:01 AM

The only things they didn't do were ban them from actually playing or banning them from TV. I think it's a fair punishment, but I don't like the way the NCAA went about it. They say this will not open a can of worms because it's a special case, but I don't quite trust them.

# 3 lonewolf371 @ 07/23/12 10:04 AM

I'm actually okay with how this came out. I was rattling a saber before the news came, but what actually happened seems fairly harsh, but not too much so. Some more stuff will possibly come from the Big Ten.

The only thing I'm not sure I agree with is the vacating of wins. Everything still happened on the field and those players were eligible, but that's a relatively minor point.

# 4 seasprite @ 07/23/12 10:09 AM

I think the AA went too far with this because I think they have no business in this situation. I still have yet to see what NCAA bylaw that Penn State violated.

# 5 THE YAMA @ 07/23/12 10:11 AM

I'm pretty happy with the final decision.

# 6 lonewolf371 @ 07/23/12 10:11 AM

I have to disagree with this point from the other thread:

Quote:


	My point is, they weren't considered a top power anymore like Michigan, Wisconsin, or Ohio State. They were more in line with my Hawkeyes... a team that is good, and has a very good season or two every few years after reloading.

Penn State won 11 games four out of five years from 2005-2009. They also had four 10+ win seasons in the Big Ten in the '90s. They were also competing to go to the Big Ten Championship last year before the Sandusky mess broke out. This is a very relevant program.

Quote:

Originally Posted by seasprite


	I think the AA went too far with this because I think they have no business in this situation. I still have yet to see what NCAA bylaw that Penn State violated.

The ethics language in the bylaws is general enough that the NCAA could use that. Also, these punishments were made in cooperation with the Penn State administration.

# 7 da ThRONe @ 07/23/12 10:13 AM

I'm ok with this.

When the crime is this heinous and was covered up by high ranking officials I have no problem with hash penalties.

# 8 wesman94 @ 07/23/12 10:15 AM

NCAA's reason for not giving the death penalty:

Quote:


	Imposing the death penalty does not address the cultural, systemic and leadership failures at Penn State. Instead, our approach demands that they become an exemplary NCAA member by eradicating the mindset that led to this tragedy. If imposed, the death penalty would impact far more student-athletes than those at the Penn State program. Indeed, hundreds of student-athletes who are not even Penn State students would be negatively impacted.

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/...20723/21207232

# 9 Retropyro @ 07/23/12 10:16 AM

I like that they fined them the $60M. I like that they stripped the school & Paterno of the 111 wins. I like the reduction in scholarships. It puts the hurt on the schools failed leaders and puts a hurt on Paterno's legacy.

I do not like the bowl ban for the next 4 seasons. That ban will only punish the current players who are simply innocent bystanders in this.

# 10 gausec @ 07/23/12 10:16 AM

I feel that the NCAA had no right to punish PSU. Why punish the players, the coaching staff, and Alumni because a few man in power were not fulfilling there job. It was a terrible thing that happened at PSU but why punish the players for something they knew nothing about. I do feel taking 60 million dollars away was the right move. But I feel that since this is real thing, it went to trail that the NCAA's power should not extend that far.

# 11 zanner @ 07/23/12 10:17 AM

The scholarships, do they lose 20 each year for 4 years.. So does that mean in Year 4 they will only be allowed 15 scholarship players? (85-10-20-20-20) ??

This will determine if they went far enough in my eyes.

# 12 wesman94 @ 07/23/12 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zanner


	The scholarships, do they lose 20 each year for 4 years.. So does that mean in Year 4 they will only be allowed 15 scholarship players? (85-10-20-20-20) ?? This will determine if they went far enough in my eyes.

They get 75 this year and 65 the next four years.

# 13 xcrushx @ 07/23/12 10:18 AM

NCAA did just fine my opinion. I feel bad for the players but thankfully they can transfer without penalty. Bill O'Brien is in a tough situation. I'd really be surprised to see him stick it out with Penn State.

# 14 da ThRONe @ 07/23/12 10:20 AM

I don't get why the NCAA don't have jurisdiction here. They placed santions on USC because Reggie Bush family worked out a deal with an agent. That had nothing to do with USC. However the NCAA essentially ruled that the university had the obligation to find out and act on it. In this case they knew something illegal were taking place and covered it up so the team could remain competive. If that doesn't fall under the NCAA jurisdiction I don't know what is?

# 15 RebelHog @ 07/23/12 10:21 AM

LOL no it wont

Sent from my Motorola bagphone

# 16 zanner @ 07/23/12 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Retropyro


	I like that they fined them the $60M. I like that they stripped the school & Paterno of the 111 wins. I like the reduction in scholarships. It puts the hurt on the schools failed leaders and puts a hurt on Paterno's legacy. I do not like the bowl ban for the next 4 seasons. That ban will only punish the current players who are simply innocent bystanders in this.

But isn't that life? They can go play elsewhere with no wait which is nice. They can stay and have their college paid for and play if they like...

To me, they're lucky to be innocent bystanders for such a heinous act .. It's life. Ask ex employees of crooked CEO's if they would have like the opportunity to keep pay for the duration of their contract or transfer to another company... Leaders are supposed to lead and be exemplary in their job and keep ethics and morals high at all times -- Not cover up something this bad just because they were scared it would tarnish the program for a year or two. They were so worried they'd lose out for a year or two that no one did anything, and ultimately caused the program to LOSE a lot more by inaction of a heinous event.

# 17 OSUFan_88 @ 07/23/12 10:22 AM

Fair enough. I think this hurts their program more now than the death penalty.

# 18 rangerrick012 @ 07/23/12 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYJetsfan


	I don't like it for 1 reason and 1 reason only, but for anything that actually effects Penn State, mind you. I don't like this because it will take away money from Inn Keepers, restaurant owners, gift shops, etc, etc. from around Happy Valley. You are punishing them for something that they had nothing to do with.

How does this take money from them? The football team will still play, just on a lower scale (which was going to be the case regardless after Paterno leaving). You couldn't just not punish them. Unfortunately that's the collateral damage,but cancelling the season would've made things worse for those folks and I think the NCAA took that into consideration when deciding.

# 19 zanner @ 07/23/12 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wesman94


	They get 75 this year and 65 the next four years.

If that's the case, I don't think they went far enough... For 10+ years of having this swept under the rug..

I think they should be reduced in scholarships to the number of Charges convicted or there abouts. I'd probably be in favor of 50 max scholarship players between now and Though the '15 season.

# 20 lonewolf371 @ 07/23/12 10:27 AM

Stuff on possible Big Ten punishment:

Quote:


	Revenue is one area where the Big Ten can punish Penn State. The league could reduce Penn State's revenue share for a determined period. The Big Ten announced last month it would distribute a record $284 million to its members at the end of the fiscal year. Penn State has been receiving a full share of revenue, which translates to $24.6 million for this fiscal year.

http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/...nalties-on-psu

Says there's a meeting at 11 a.m. on what to do. We may hear more after that.

« Previous12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9…38 39 Next »

More Links

Sound off: Did the NCAA Go Far Enough with Penn State?